The Myth of Artificial Intelligence: A Tool, Not a Thinker

The evolution of human intelligence and knowledge dissemination began long before the digital age. Aristotle, the great philosopher, laid the groundwork for what would eventually become the bedrock of modern education. His vision of educational collaboration—where ideas and knowledge would be shared openly—was the precursor to libraries and universities. These institutions became a catalyst for human growth, allowing minds to develop, theories to evolve, and societies to prosper through a shared pool of knowledge. Fast forward to the present, and mankind has once again pushed the boundaries of knowledge-sharing, this time through the development of Artificial Intelligence (AI).

But in this race to innovate, have we blurred the lines between a tool and something more? Is AI truly “intelligent,” or is it simply a more sophisticated, albeit artificial, extension of our existing technology?

The Evolution of Knowledge

For centuries, human progress relied on the creation and dissemination of knowledge through structured means. Public education was a revolutionary concept that transformed societies, allowing individuals to learn and contribute to the larger pool of understanding. The rise of universities and libraries meant that knowledge was no longer a privilege of the elite but something that could be accessed and expanded by anyone willing to learn. This democratization of education was, and still is, a cornerstone of human progress.

Now, as we continue to evolve, mankind is testing the limits of what tools can achieve. AI represents the latest in a long line of innovations designed to enhance our ability to learn, create, and problem-solve. However, while AI is incredibly effective at processing and organizing information, the question remains: is it truly intelligent, or is it just an artificial tool that mimics intelligence?

Intelligence or Just Clever Engineering?

To answer this, we must first consider what AI is at its core. Unlike human beings, AI doesn’t learn through experience or emotion. It doesn’t form original thoughts or ideas. It isn’t sentient, nor does it possess creativity in the way humans do. Instead, AI is trained on vast amounts of data—data that it did not seek out on its own but was fed by humans.

This is where the term “AI Harvesting” comes into play. AI models, like ChatGPT, must be meticulously trained and manipulated to produce the results we want. They aren’t capable of independent thought or self-guided learning. While they excel at tasks like drafting a blog or assisting with college essays, they still rely on humans to correct their mistakes, tweak their phrasing, and ensure the final product aligns with human intent. In fact, while I can use AI to help me craft a blog post, I still find myself spending time editing, adjusting, and infusing my own voice into the work.

AI has undoubtedly revolutionized certain processes—especially when it comes to writing or handling repetitive tasks—but it is not intelligent in the way humans are. It’s a tool that, when used properly, can significantly reduce the time it takes to accomplish tasks. For example, I’ve found that AI can cut down my writing time by 80%, allowing me to focus on refining the final product. However, I still need to intervene, especially when it comes to creative tasks or those that require a personal touch.

A Tool with Limitations

One of the most obvious limitations of AI is in tasks that require complex reasoning or creativity. For example, while AI can easily assist me in generating sample writing for my children’s grade levels, it’s far less effective when it comes to subjects like math, where showing the work is essential. AI can generate the correct answer, but it struggles to replicate the thought process required to solve the problem in a way a child can follow and learn from.

This underscores a key point: while AI excels at tasks that involve regurgitating or synthesizing information, it falls short when it comes to original, human-like intelligence. It doesn’t learn in the organic way that humans do. AI models are essentially complex encyclopedias, capable of piecing together information but lacking the capacity for true understanding or creativity.

The Myth of Intelligence

The term “Artificial Intelligence” itself is somewhat misleading. Intelligence implies the ability to learn, adapt, and think critically—qualities that AI simply does not possess. What AI offers is not intelligence but efficiency. It can process information at incredible speeds and assist humans in tasks that were once time-consuming, but it doesn’t “think” in any meaningful way. It’s important to recognize that the current models of AI are based on mathematical algorithms and data processing, not true cognitive development.

This leads us to a fundamental question: if AI isn’t intelligent in the way we define human intelligence, should we even be calling it “Artificial Intelligence”? Perhaps it’s more accurate to describe it as an advanced tool, a digital assistant capable of enhancing our abilities but not replacing them. AI is still dependent on human input, whether it’s in the form of data, training, or guidance.

The Paradox of Progress

In many ways, our modern reliance on AI echoes Aristotle’s dream of educational collaboration. We have created a tool that can compile and distribute knowledge faster than any human could. But this tool, impressive as it is, does not replace the human experience of learning, creating, and thinking critically. AI, at least in its current form, is not capable of developing the original ideas that have driven human progress for millennia.

Imagine if Aristotle could see the vast digital libraries and AI-driven education models that exist today. He would likely be in awe of how far we’ve come, yet perhaps he would also question the depth of this artificial knowledge. Has our push to develop tools like AI inadvertently created a paradox, where we have more information at our fingertips than ever before, but less genuine intelligence driving its creation?

The Writer’s Dilemma: AI and Creative Work

This brings us to a contentious issue: the use of creative works to train AI models. Writers, artists, and filmmakers have expressed concerns about their works being used to “educate” AI. But should this be seen as fundamentally different from a human learning from the same material?

If I purchase a book or a movie, do I owe the creator more money every time I revisit it? Or when I share the knowledge gained from that book with my children, should I be charged again? The same could be argued for AI—if it learns from publicly available works, is it any different than a student who studies those same works? While the scale of learning may differ, the principle remains the same: the exchange of knowledge is a natural progression.

Moreover, if artists are dissatisfied with how much they’ve made from their work, perhaps the issue isn’t with AI but with the pricing and distribution model they originally employed. Charging more for their work up front, or negotiating better royalties, might be the more appropriate avenue for addressing these concerns rather than stifling the growth of AI.

Conclusion: A Tool, Not a Thinker

At the end of the day, AI is an incredible tool—but it is just that, a tool. It doesn’t think, it doesn’t create, and it doesn’t learn in the way humans do. It can enhance our productivity, reduce the time spent on certain tasks, and even help us generate ideas, but it still relies on human oversight to refine and perfect its output.

The myth of Artificial Intelligence as something truly intelligent is just that—a myth. AI is powerful, yes, but it is not a replacement for human creativity or intelligence. It’s important to keep this distinction in mind as we continue to push the boundaries of what AI can do. We must recognize its limitations while embracing its potential to enhance, but not replace, the unique qualities that make us human.